At Mac-Less MacWorld, Apple Completes Transition to Consumer Electronics Company

During his MacWorld 2007 keynote address in San Francisco yesterday, Apple CEO Steve Jobs did the unthinkable: He didn't discuss the Mac even once, other than to note early on that this year's MacWorld would be about other products. He then went on to devote almost the entirety of his two-hour speech to an expensive, high-end smart phone that won't ship for at least six months.

Onlookers who were looking forward to the "secret" new features in Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" that Jobs promised back in August will have to wait: The upcoming OS wasn't even mentioned. There was no talk of new Mac hardware, no new iLife or iWork application suites. Jobs didn't discuss whether the Mac had gained market share in the PC industry, and didn't provide any sort of counterpunch to the upcoming launch of Windows Vista, which is expected to further distance Apple from the mainstream computing market.

No, Jobs has clearly sensed that there are changes brewing in the market. While Apple's yearly revenues for Macintosh computers have barely edged up in over five years, the company's revenues of iPods and related products and services have skyrocketed. In 2006, in fact, iPod-related revenues will almost certainly match those of the Mac for the first time. Apple, it seems, is becoming a consumer electronics company.

Jobs admitted as much indirectly. First, he announced that the company was changing its name from Apple Computer Inc. to Apple, Inc., a tacit admission that Macintosh is no longer the focus. Second, he said after his keynote that the company now has four major product categories: Mac, iPod, Apple TV, and iPhone. Two of those products were formally announced in the past six months, one yesterday.

The Apple TV is, by far, the least interesting. Due in late February and costing $299, the Apple TV is an expensive set-top box that streams music, TV, and movie content from Apple's iTunes software on a PC or Mac. As Microsoft's David Caulton sarcastically (but accurately) put it in a blog entry, "It's a $299 device that lets you watch TV in your living room!" The point here is that the Apple TV doesn't offer much value over existing solutions, and it certainly doesn't offer any of the storage or backup features of Microsoft's Windows Home Server or the digital video recording (DVR) functionality of Windows Media Center. In short, it's not very compelling.

The iPhone, however, will get a lot of press, despite its amazingly high price: At $499 and $599 for the two iPhone models, plus a two year commitment to Cingular, the iPhone may just be the highest-price phone on the market. It does, however, offer the indefinable "something" that graces so many Apple products: A beautiful (if large, for a phone) form factor, an elegant user interface, and more technology per square inch than perhaps any device on the planet.

The iPhone features a beautiful 320 x 480 pixel widescreen display with touch controls, a gorgeous user interface, multimedia and remote email capabilities, and numerous high-end features. It can function as an iPod, a smart phone, or an Internet communicator, and it runs an embedded version of Mac OS X, the operating system at the heart of Apple's Mac computers. (Microsoft has created embedded versions of Windows for several years.)

Jobs says that Apple's goal is to seize just 1 percent of cell phone sales this year, which requires the company to sell 10 million iPhone units. That's certainly possible, as Apple will pass the 200 million mark for iPods sold this year. But success in this market isn't guaranteed. Apple's phone design won't run on Sprint or Verizon networks, which together account for almost twice as many customers as Cingular, the network for which the iPhone is exclusively made. Even the iPhone name is contested, since Cisco trademarked the term previously and never game Apple permission to use it. Apple says it's negotiating with Cisco for rights to the name. And it's unclear how big the market is for a device that's that expensive: Most cell phone carriers give away or heavily discount smart phones to customers that sign two-year agreements.

Whatever happens, give Jobs credit for having the courage to reinvent Apple yet again. Mr. Jobs has been at the helm for most Apple's biggest historic shifts, including the Macintosh in 1984, Mac OS X in 2001, the iPod in 2001, and the shift to the Intel platform in 2006. If Jobs pulls off this transition, Apple could very well become the next Sony: A consumer electronics super-giant with a valuable brand, lust-worthy products, and a presence in numerous lucrative markets. That would be quite a feat.

"If the tables were turned, do you think Apple would allow someone to blatantly infringe on their rights? How would Apple react if someone launched a product called iPod but claimed it was ok to use the name because it used a different video format? Would that be ok? We know the answer – Apple is a very aggressive enforcer of their trademark rights. And that needs to be a two-way street."
"This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not, and may not be, offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained." --Apple.com as required by United States FCC regulations
Methinks the announcement was rushed. But hey, it's a small price to pay for Jobs to get to 'release the secret to the world' right?

Oh, and by the way, I don't want anybody thinking i was contradicting myself about calming down my posts...Bill Gates is just as arrogant as Steve Jobs...most CEOs of large corps tend to be that way.
--tayme

Well this is what Lord Jobs' personal assistant to the Times says about iPhone,
"
- Can't download songs directly from iTunes Store
- Can't sync iPhone with a computer wirelessly.
- "Web speed was OK—not great, but OK."
- "Apple went through numerous iterations of the glass surface, trying to find one that’s not too slick or too rough, or that shows grease and fingerprints too much. "
- "It feels amazing in your hand"
- "Typing is difficult""
This is going to bring the cellular world (and somehow Microsoft) to it's knees? Eh, Preston/Bonch/Vandill?
Remember David Pogue probably is the _best_ review it could get.

In related news:
http://www.electronista.com/articles/06/12/19/iphone.name.available/
"...of the four currently active "iPhone" trademarks held at the US Patent and Trademark Office, only one -- serial number 75076573 -- has been granted to Linksys' parent company Cisco. The remaining trademarks are owned by other companies and are hotly contested...
"Significantly, only the Ocean Telecom patent addresses music, referring to "MP3 and other digital format audio players" as well as telephone services. Cisco's patent only covers "integrated telephone communication with computerized global information networks," according to the USPTO entry. In tandem with the previous conflicts between other "iPhone" filings, the limited Cisco trademark may not claim absolute authority over Apple's future attempts to use the "iPhone" name for its widely anticipated music phone."
Looks like the battle has just begun. Still, what a boneheaded move on the part of Apple.

"320x480 screen"
Since when is 3:2 a 'widescreen' format? At least the PSP tried to have 16:9 with square pixels (480x272, off by about 3 pixels wide, but even then its an irrational number). I'd need to see an iPhone Cisco(c) up close playing a 16:9 movie before I made a decision as to buying it.
320 must be some short pixels heh.

bmnbmn:
"And like Paul, I do feel that Apple has officially changed paths, and the concentration on the Mac computer line will dwindle."
Not according to Phil Schiller. They announce an iPhone, and all the sudden, the Mac is being abandoned? You all said the same thing two years ago after the iPod video and nano were released, and the next year was dominated by Macs.
Rumor has it a special event is coming up specifically for OS X Leopard and iLife. What will you guys say then? You'll conveniently forget everything you're saying now, that's what.
"Since much article space has already been euphoric on the positives of this device, I will instead cover some of the negatives, many of which would be deal breakers (for me at least, and I suspect many other current smartphone users)"
Not at all. People will be lining up for this revolutionary Mac-in-your-hand that is five years ahead of everybody else, which is typical for Apple. Jefferies is actually downgrading Motorola stock based on the idea that Apple will be taking its marketshare. See you in line for an iPhone!

The iPhone does sound pretty cool. It looks very fragile though and I would probably break it in a few months. I also think it is dumb to lock into cingular.
It makes sense for them to get out of the OS business. They should make it open source and take the linux path.

iPhone - cute, but does it come in "men's"?
without a replaceable battery, can you even open it? what about SIM card support? what about unlockability?
480x320 is NOT 16:9 unless they use non-square pixels (usually not possible with LCD's, and DEFINITELY not a good idea!). 480x270 is 16:9, but often 272 is used because it's divisible by 8 and many compression schemes are based on an 8-pixel matrix at minimum. for you Mackies out there, check out some of those Quicktime movie trailers at "high" quality (not the HD ones). most of those are at 480x272 and it proves my point. and try not to get hit with any of the new MoAB bugs while you're at it!
thanks but no thanks. i'll stick to my Q. i'm not paying $500US for a device that still requires a 2 year term. what does that equate to without a term? $1000? and besides that, it's not available yet, and still won't be available outside of the US for a long time.
no thanks - for $1000 i'll buy a much more powerful Vista UMPC that runs full version software.
and many of those actually have keyboards!

At the very start of the keynote, Steve Jobs said Apple has several great Mac products planned for 2007, but they wouldn't be discussed. At the end of the keynote, he said "See you again soon." Obviously, another media event is coming up.
Mac revenues haven't "barely edged up" in the past few years, they've been setting records every quarter.
If you need any more proof that Apple is still focused on the Mac, how about Phil Schiller saying so today? He told CNN Apple is not getting out of the computer business. In fact, the iPhone IS a Mac. It even runs OS X.
Wow, that must scare you Windows-loving Apple-haters. Millions and millions of people will be using portable Macs in their hands.
NateB2:
"To complete the transition, Apple should work with MS in developing Windows Vienna and create a compatibility layer that will allow Mac apps to run natively on Vienna."
Uh, why? That would be a downgrade for them, forcing them to code for the aging Win32 API for an insecure, bloated operating system. Vista is already a flop, so why would Apple want to chain themselves to a sinking ship like Microsoft?
It's funny watching you guys. You're in such shellshock after the iPhone announcement that you want Apple to team up with Microsoft so Microsoft can ride Apple's coattails. Not gonna happen. Microsoft is dying, and Apple/Google are leading.

@Nate
A company being arrogant? Notify the press about this revolutionary breakthrough!
But really Apple is no more arrogant than Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, and any other software/hardware company. All make stupid decisions regarded patents/trademarks.
Let's not forget when Microsoft sued a Mike Rowe over his domain name because when pronounced it sounded like Microsoft.

"Really, guys, Apple comes out with what nearly everyone, including Paul, calls a historic product, and all you guys can do is carp about the name? Rather petty behavior."
You nailed that one right on the button. Why focus the discussions on how great the product is when you can totally divert the attention to something else. "They stole the name", or "Apple is the next Sony." Not much talk about the technology itself at all. Now, let's choose sides. Me and Preston will be the zealots here simply because this product is amazing, and you guys can all turn the other cheek and talk about how arrogant everyone else is.

I agree with Preston and Paul. This macworld was an official declaration by Jobs that OSX is 'giving up' to Vista. Apple Computer has surrendered, they've given up fighting the Microsoft Juggernaut, and moved on to trying to tackle the em battered Sony.
Although Paul is wrong on one point, the PS3 is the most 'tech/inch' dense device, with 3 1200+ pin count processors within 1 sq.ft.
Yep, Preston admitting that Apple Corporation has finally given up must be hard. But hey, maybe the revenue from iPod/iPhone/iPeople can let Apple entertain silly adventures just like Microsoft does. OSX could be your Zune ;)

The progression from iPod to cell phones was inevitable, there was nothing innovative about this other than the Apple moniker and apps. It's nice to see a fresh competitor to existing companies, but there really isn't much to this that stands out and screams "YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS!"
There are a few cell phones out already offering the ability to play digital music and video and at least one upcoming for streaming TV. The integration of an OS interface has been done for years by Palm and Microsoft. Touch screens, web browsing, camera phones, e-mail, phone... all ideas that have been already done.
Anyhow, looking at the initial press reports of the Apple cell phone I was caught by 4 things:
1. "I wonder how it will take the abuse." Cell phones are abuse magnets as they tend to fall off of desks, out of laps/holsters, get banged when in pockets and get tossed around in bags and purses. For instance, the Motorola "Q" is a nice unit, but they get damaged a lot easier than the Blackberry 7290s. This is not to mention the scratching that will inevitably occur through normal use with a touch screen.
2. "Yikes! The price." $500 for a unit that will be outdated within 2 years and lacks a replaceable battery seems quite steep, even by Apple hardware standards. A "Q" and a number of other similarly capable phones (the MotoRazor even has iTunes capability) come in at under $200 and a Blackberry can be had for less.
3. "Cisco is going to sue." Blatent trademark infringement on a name is a nono. Needless to say, Cisco has already filed a lawsuit.
4. "Hmmm. Can it do productivity tasks?" It's nice that you can use it instead of the iPod that you haven't had long enough to fill its memory, but it does not appear to have anything more than the typical options found with even low end cell phones (unless you count options for 'stocks' and 'weather'): notes, web and e-mail.
On the positive side, it is a nice looking phone. Can I play Super Breakout on it?
Cheers,
T

"I just found out on www.neowin.net: Apple is being sued in federal court by Cisco for using the name iPhone without Cisco's permission! "
Yeah, I saw that too, apparently Cisco thought it an insult that Apple decided to go ahead and use the name before talks had finished up.
Kudos Cisco, light those turtlenecks up. I say charge royalties as well as a lump sum settlement.
Why Apple didn't take the route they are with their "TV" (throwing an apple infront of a stock unpatentable word) is beyond me.

Well, Gates takes error with a little bit more straightforwardness. Not to say he doesn't get angry, but at least he doesn't come off as holier than thou.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMFYOzg_VWY
At macworld 06, Apple can't even deal with the possibility of seeing leopard crash, so they run 4 Demo boxes on a kvm switch, when one crashes, switch to the next... hopefully with nobody noticing. One crashed during time machine.
The one thing I would applaud Apple for is a little bit of humbleness. I was proud of them for not attacking Vista this year, but directly calling the treo700 'crap', that's just childish. Last I checked treo engineers didn't say anything about Apple. Acting like you are the savior of the consumers because everyone else in the mobile phone industry is just too stupid to make a decent phone really doesn't build bridges.

Cisco is going to sell the name... 'undisclosed price' which is politically correct for 'oodles'.
As for the damage to the thing, the exposure is going to be different, for example, the free phones that come with a plan (like mine) usually get treated like crap, because thats what they are, crap. I know some people that enjoy their smartphones, and treat them like their first born, they don't see near the abuse my crappy flip does.
The make or break thing is going to come down to is if the price fits the target demographic. If Apple is indeed targeting 'hip young' crowds... will these people shell out 600US for a iPod that is smaller than their 30GB, just to have their phone with it? Everyone I know in the 16-26 demo has a cheap/crappy phone, nobody in that age range that I know actually has a smartphone... my mom does, but she's in a rather higher group (55-65)... so Apple may strengthen its aging userbase.
In the end, think about what you are paying for. Most people who are potential buyers already have an iPod, a phone, and a tiny laptop for email. Paying 600US for all of it in one small case (and only one battery) may not win people over.

The iPhone, as Jobs proudly dubbed the device to thunderous applause, will be three devices in one: a cell phone, a wide-screen iPod with touch controls, and an Internet communications device
www.mp4-converter.net/zune-converter/

@jersey72
I concur. Competition is always a good thing. While I don't see widespread adoption of this, some of the principles will definitely leak to the other cell phone manufacturers, and the result will be better phones for everyone.

>>> Onlookers who were looking forward to the "secret" new features in Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" that Jobs promised back in August will have to wait...>>>
What about the new touch screen interface (manual/"touch" manipulation of images/data)?
If it's in a supposedly "stripped down" version of OSX (to fit the iPhone), why wouldn't/couldn't it also appear in the full blown edition?
Perhaps the next iMac (or Mac Tablet? ... the iPhone is already a mini-tablet) will have a built-in touch screen to manipulate images on screen by just using your fingers.
Guess it's too late for MS to add it to Vista's January release :-)

"That would be the five years that included the last three years would it?
The three years where Mac sales in units has grown by 76%.
The three years where Mac sales in dollars has grown by 64%."
Well, I believe paul was talking in actual and not relative figures.
For example, if little Jimmy has a dollar and finds 3 quarters, he's made 75% profit. But nobody cares.
---
One thing that is interesting is the secretive nature of Apple. For example, Apple won't say what processor is in the iPhone. Why is that?
It also got me thinking. Microsoft receives so much criticism for making their Vista OS. It's taken so long, they've had to restart, it's kinda buggy, etc.
But, by Jobs' own admission, this iPhone has taken Apple years to make, and they make it in secret so that, _they_ say don't have to worry about people stealing their ideas. But you can't deny that it doesn't help that people arn't allowed to see all of their screwups and restarts. I mean, 'years' to make a phone? And Apple jokes about MS spending years to make an 80M line code OS?
Cmon people.

I just found out on www.neowin.net: Apple is being sued in federal court by Cisco for using the name iPhone without Cisco's permission! Cisco is going to win. They can sue for millions. What defense does Apple have? Even though they were in negotiations to buy the name, Cisco did not give their permission to use it.
This is hilarious! I'm beginning to think that Steve Jobs thinks he's God incarnate!

"It's nice to see a fresh competitor to existing companies, but there really isn't much to this that stands out and screams "YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS!"
Well, you're entitled to your opinion. But judging from all the positive press and comments I'm seeing everywhere, I think there are a lot of people who would disagree with you.
By the way, for those of you with Zunes (Microsoft's iPod/iPhone competitor), Microsoft's Peter Moore had a great announcement at CES: Microsoft is planning on it being able to play games by July of 2008.
:-)

Derek, the product is not even released yet, and suddenly it is awesome? How do you know that? Have you used the touchscreen? Browsed at EDGE speeds? Confirmed the battery life?
As was mentioned, we were explicitly talking about the lawsuit. Cisco owns the copyright for a similar product, or group of products with the iPhone name. They have since 2000/2001. Apple approached Cisco about using the iPhone name. Negotiations never completed with a signed contract, and Apple released the phone under the iPhone moniker. Cisco has a pretty solid case here. This lawsuit has nothing to do with the capabilities of the device. It *IS* relevant to the device, however, because a protracted legal battle over the name could delay the product from shipping, or could result in a name change, or result in royalty payments. Any of these results would impact the product and/or Apple negatively.
And quite frankly Derek, there is not much talk about the technology because Apple has not provided too many details. What processor is it running? Who is actually building the thing? Battery replacement costs? Application availability? 3rd party developer support? What plans will be offered from Cingular? DRM restrictions?
You want to talk about the technology? OK, how about the lack of 3G data?
And BTW, the Apple is the next Sony remark is supposed to be a *compliment*.

The debate here is starting to get interesting.
Ask yourself, "Why is this so historic?"
Touch screen... already done
Web access... already done
E-mail access... already done
Music player... already done
Video... already done
Color display... already done
Integrated OS... already done
Camera... already done
Additional storage space... already done
Buttonless, hmmm. So how do you turn it on/off? Let the battery run out/charge it? Pull the battery? Press the screen? Swear at it?
Plain and simple, it's historic not because of the technology or the features, but because it is a new product type from a computer company.
How great is it? Good question, maybe we should ask someone outside of Apple and Cingular that has it and used it on a regular basis, that doesn't have a vested interest in it? Wait, you cannot, because as of yet, it is an unreleased product. So, at this point everyone is just looking at press releases and pictures and saying how swelltacular it is.
Undoubtedly, the market segment Apple is looking at is with the household. Looking at the $500-600 price range though, the competition in the consumer electronics arena will not be with other phones, but with televisions and game consoles. Be honest, if you could choose one of two similarly priced options from a practical standpoint, which would you go with?
1. A cellphone by Apple
2. A camera, digital video and MP3 player integrated into a cellphone, a video iPod and a Nintendo Wii
Cheers,
TB

"My prediction is that Apple, Inc. will end up with the iPhone name...they might have to spend millions; either to buy the name or to fight the court battle and pay the penalty, but somehow they will end up with the name."
I think that you're all making too much out of the iPhone name issue. Apple could name the phone "iDirt" and millions will still clamor to buy it. If getting control of the iPhone name is too much trouble, they'll simply name it something else. In fact, isn't this what they've done with the also introduced AppleTV system? I notice that they didn't name it "iTV", presumeably because some other company has the rights to that name. So if Cingular causes too much of a problem, they'll simply rename the phone the "ApplePhone" or something like that. Problem solved.
Really, guys, Apple comes out with what nearly everyone, including Paul, calls a historic product, and all you guys can do is carp about the name? Rather petty behavior.

The PDA phones have been about along while now all with touchscreen tech. and each new one has improved sencitivity. I got no doubts that the iphone will let us down. Ive hear that there will be 5 colours aswell. Exciting stuff
http://www.pspconverter.com/iphone_converter/

To complete the transition, Apple should work with MS in developing Windows Vienna and create a compatibility layer that will allow Mac apps to run natively on Vienna. This will allow Apple, Inc., to get out of the OS business and focus more on manufacturing quality hardware and consumer electronics. Leave the hard work of OS development to MS. :-)
Actually, wouldn't it be cool if Apple's UI designers merged with Microsoft's stable and one-kernel architecture to create one amazing operating system? They could use MS's "Blend" technology and create some stunning GUI shells. Think of it: You could effortlessly switch between a more mac-like GUI, or a Windows GUI, with little or no performance issues. If, for some reason that happened, I really wonder how Jobs would spin it at the presentation. :-)

Poor Paul. Apple shows up Microsoft AGAIN. It's got to be frustrating to see over and over that Apple produces SUPERIOR products. That's right, SUPERIOR. Sorry to use the S word, Paul. But the truth sometimes hurts.

@Paul
"While Apple's yearly revenues for Macintosh computers have barely edged up in over five years. ......"
That would be the five years that included the last three years would it?
The three years where Mac sales in units has grown by 76%.
The three years where Mac sales in dollars has grown by 64%.

Note to everyone: yes, the smilies indicated a joke. Think a bonch comment in reverse.
@Preseton
I'm wondering if I should even respond, but I'll do so for the other intelligent posters who comment on this site. MS Research has done *extensive* gesture-based multi-touch research for years now. To my knowledge, they are integrating that technology in Windows Vista.
Still not believing me?
Check this out:
http://research.microsoft.com/~awilson/papers/ICMI%202004%20TouchLight.pdf
Video:
http://research.microsoft.com/~awilson/TouchLight%20Oct%2004%20with%20narration%201.0Mbps.wmv
And this video (fast forward to 36:00)
http://www.podtech.net/scobleshow/technology/1218/the-gestures-of-microsoft-research-a-walking-tour
And this extremely cool demo:
http://research.microsoft.com/~awilson/PlayAnywhere%20final%201Mbps.wmv
That last one, to me, is innovation at its finest. Imagine projecting that on a dining room table, a desk, a coffee table, etc.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but Apple was not the innovator here. Not at all.

I'm with Preston on this one. Apple has an operating system update coming out later this year, and a whole new line of macs that are barely a year old. They're not moving away from computers. That's like saying because Microsoft released the Xbox, they're moving away from Windows... No, they're just expanding to different markets. Get real people.

@Lotsa
Sorry, Apple is no Sony. Despite their recent lamentable record, Apple cannot (yet) hold a candle to Sony for the breadth and range of quality gear that they make.
Should Apple finally take the plunge and become the full fledged all round maker of entertainment gear they seem to be apiring to be then maybe they might just make it. But just because they sell an MP3 player, a phone, a poor extremely overpriced and limited imitation of media centre and a computer or two doesn't make them anywhere near a Sony.
Oh, I'm no Sony fan boy. I hate what they are trying to do with their invidious malware, and forcing of standards a la PS3. But I do buy their TV's, HiFi kit, Video cameras, all the stuff they do so much better than the rest. Apple is just as infested with the lock in traits. Thanks but no thanks.

"To complete the transition, Apple should work with MS in developing Windows Vienna and create a compatibility layer that will allow Mac apps to run natively on Vienna. This will allow Apple, Inc., to get out of the OS business and focus more on manufacturing quality hardware and consumer electronics. Leave the hard work of OS development to MS. :-)"
Does your "smiley face" indicate that the above is a joke? In all honesty, I don't think that Apple or anyone else would be willing to commit to any collaboration which involves Microsoft developing a new OS version. Not after seeing what has happened with Longhorn/Vista.

DerekTraver:
Everyone said the same thing in 2005 after the video and nano iPods. "Apple is abandoning the Mac!" We've been hearing it for years. Then 2006 turned out to be the greatest year for Mac updates in Apple history, and MacBooks were a hit. Steve Jobs wanted to devote the keynote to the iPhone, as well he should--it's a historic product launch in the vein of the original iPod announcement.
A Leopard keynote is coming soon, I betcha.
sticknick:
It's all in good fun. Seriously. Mac users had to listen to DOS users mock them through the 80s for not having a command prompt. Then you got Windows 95, and suddenly the GUI was cool again, so you mocked Mac users for not running PCs. It's been 20 years of constant mocking. So don't be surprised to see defensive Mac users who point out how well Apple is doing now and how they're an industry-leader finally getting the recognition they deserve. :)
But seriously, Microsoft just feels so bland and non-innovative these days. Why wasn't Zune like this? Why didn't they make Zune a cutting-edge touchscreen device with phone capabilities and an Internet browser? I can't imagine the thought process behind rebranding a Toshiba Gigabeat and expecting that to compete with Apple's R&D department.

nim55:
They're dodging chairs from Steve Ballmer. The industry just got hit with an ultra-portable Mac in your pocket. It's the future, today.
And just think, we still have OS X Leopard to look forward to (especially since Vista is just a copy of an old version of OS X from years ago).